The types of argument come from the "Five Basic Types of Public Argument" box on Writing Public Lives page 414. The five types are listed as follows:
- Position
- Casual
- Evaluative
- Proposal
- Refutation
 |
| Esseh. "Different Directional AP axes in three body segments of a horse." 04/14/2007 via Wikimedia. Public Domain Dedication. |
Position Argument: This type of argument is very effective for my kind of argument. If I were to include both sides of the debate in my argument, I could credible present the issue to my audience. Through all of this, I can still give my views and opinions supporting geoengineering without compromising my reliability or credibility.
Evaluative Argument: Using this type of argument would be an efficient way to represent the field of geoengineering as a positive process to my audience. This argument would have to be supported by a large amount of supporting data and statistics if this argument were to be effective. As an author, if I were able to persuade a reader then that would satisfy the main goal of the argument.
Refutation Argument: This argument would be a great way to break down the reputation of an opposing idea or cause. The major consequence would be a large amount of criticism from readers, especially if they had predispositions on the side of the opposition. If successful in persuading my readers, I could definitely label my argument as a job well done.
In Reflection, reading through Savannah's posts and Kelly's posts, I have learned that they both have similar but different approaches to myself. All of us are shooting to inform readers about the issues surrounding topics. I will most likely use the method of evaluating the methods of geoengineering as good, while Savannah seems will be using a method of giving both sides with additions of her opinions. Kelly aims to mainly inform as she states that many do not know about the healing benefits of ice bathing. Overall, I am confident our arguments will persuade with ease.
Savannah's posts: Rhetorical Action Plan / Considering Types
Kelly's posts: Rhetorical Action Plan / Considering Types
Savannah's posts: Rhetorical Action Plan / Considering Types
Kelly's posts: Rhetorical Action Plan / Considering Types
I'm initially impressed that you have so many different routes you could take. With my argument, I found that there was only one obvious choice of argument for me. From reading your "My Rhetorical Plan" post, my initial impression would be that either the evaluative or position would be best for your purpose. With these argument types you could focus on the broad topic of geoengineering in today's society, rather than on specifics like you would in the refutation. Reading you plan, I felt this was more what you were aiming for. You seem very well-equipped to choose either method though!
ReplyDeleteI am very impress by the detail presented in this post, especially in the evaluation of the argument type's effect on presenting your position, facts, and refutation of the opposition. I feel more inclined towards the refutation style because it allows be to discredit the opposition early on in the piece. This coupled with the concept that I could later offer a solution to the issue.
ReplyDelete